Posted on 11/12/2004 4:19:06 AM PST by cbcloud
When you look behind the numbers, that's the real meaning of Tuesday's stunning reelection victory by President George W. Bush over Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry.
The election, which many polls said was neck and neck going in to the voting, wound up with a decisive victory, albeit not a landslide, for the president, who got 51% of the popular vote.
The pundits are scrambling to explain it all. Some say Senator Kerry's lack of focus until late in the campaign and his difficulty in explaining his votes on the Iraq war raised questions about his ability to lead the U.S. during a time of peril...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.barrons.com ...
1. They fix their flawed primary system. A small group of radical activists in Iowa and New Hampshire pretty much determine who their candidate will be.
2. Quit nominating liberal senators from the Northeast...or nominating ANY senator. When was the last time a senator was elected president without going through the Vice-Presidency first..? The "other" JFK 44 years ago.(thanks to some "fuzzy math" ballot counting in Illinois). The senate is a good showcase for the "peacocks," but not a good training ground for the presidency. Governorships are much better.
3. Figure out how to neutralize the population flow from blue states to red states. Good luck with that..! If the democrats thought 2004 was important, then 2008 will be deathly critical. The 2010 census will give even more electoral votes to the red states.
Without some radical changes, the CUBS will win the World Series before the Democrats are back in the White House...
When you look behind the numbers, that's the real meaning of Tuesday's stunning reelection victory by President George W. Bush over Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry.
I respect the ideas put forth in this article, but consider: Kerry himself never really believed he would win the Presidency - that's why he kept his seat in the Senate, so he could go back to his "day job" when the show was over. Conveniently, the press never hounded him about it like they did Senator Dole in '96.
As long as the rats are obsessed with regaining power (dominance) and put the national interest after that, they are doomed to be 'second.'
The most amazing and frightening thing to me is that Kerry actually got 48.5% of the vote.
Let's not go manic here . . . With our strength disproportionately in the less populated states, Republicans have a structural advantage in the Electoral College and in the Senate. But with all his disqualifications (no executive experience, a 1971 videotape of him being a perjuring traitor, and a record of opposition to the wildly successful Reagan administration) Kerry pulled 48% of the popular vote, and came within Ohio of victory. What would have happened if he hadn't been facing an incumbent??Democrats have a structural advantage of their own - free, pseudocompetitve journalism. Journalism is only pseudocompetitive, in that journalists define the term "journalist" by destroying the reputation of anyone who claims to be a journalist but does not kowtow to the conceit that all other members of the guild are "objective."
Not only so, but judges and Republican elected officials, being subject to the flattery and derision of that guild, have a remarkable tendency to "grow" towards the go-along-and-get-along leftist consensus journalism naturally promotes.
Also, we must all work diligently in the coming months to convince “progressives” that the Democratic Party has let them down. They must abandon the party. Their only recourse is to join and work for the Green Party moving forward. I may even register as a Green Party member to swell their voter registration rolls. Divide and conquer.
Begin with putting all known “progressives” in your sphere of influence on the Green Party mail list from their website. Great fun. Start inundating them with information now.
In other words, Democrats, there are more of them than there are of you—and that's likely to continue.
The reason: Blue states like Illinois and Pennsylvania are losing population relative to red states like Texas, Florida and Georgia. And people who move to the red states tend to either adopt or bring with them the more conservative attitudes of their new homes.
The power of Democratic strongholds continues to shrink. New York, Franklin D. Roosevelt's home state, once dominated the electoral map, with 45 electoral votes. The Empire State now has 31, trailing California and Texas, and Florida is nipping at its heels.
In the 1960 election, which John F. Kennedy won narrowly against Richard M. Nixon, the northeastern states accounted for 136 electoral votes. On Tuesday they delivered 104 electoral votes to Kerry. The Great Lakes states of Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota, which Kerry also carried, have lost 12 electoral votes since 1960.
All your demographics are belong to us!
.. Kerry actually got 48.5% of the vote...
Remember 50% of the people you meet are below average.
The only Blue State growing in population is California. The rest are expected to lost seats to the South and Southwest. Another electoral vote or two in CA won't save the Democrats from the fact they have to make it up elsewhere. Hard to do when your strongholds are five more votes behind the rest of the country.
Most of the governorships are GOP, even of the largest blue states - NY and CA.
Gray Davis would have been in the mix, except that under his administration, the fiscal situation of CA started to resemble that of a Third World country. Governors from very liberal NE states, Vermont, e.g. just aren't going to resonate in fly over country.
OIC...Bush doesn't have a mandate..Yet Clinton did, with his, what, 40-49% or somewhere inbetween there?
The democrats are prisoners of the Pro Abortion--Gun Grabbin--Homosexual Pushing--Tree Worshipping--Anti Religion --Anti Military-- America is The Cause of All the World Ills --wack jobs that are the basis of the VAST majority of their $$$$$$$$$$$
They say $$$$$ is the mother's milk of politics and the democrats ain't got no other teats to feast on
No way they can shake off that Tar Baby and survive financially
I should add the one problem is that a lot of the RED states are gaining population from illegal immigration same as some Blues and that ain't good and there doesn't seem to be any effort to stop it
Maybe that's why GW wants to give amnesty to existing illegals. Especially with the percentage of latin americans voting republican.
Clinton at 43% as I remember. Third party dilution
Me too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.